Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Bill Rammell (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 23 January 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Sale of Student Loans Bill.


Sale of Student Loans Bill

That is not the case. If the hon. Gentleman reads the record carefully, he will see that the matter was made abundantly clear. When we talk about a random draw, we are talking in terms of the type of loan, not about picking and choosing between individual loans. It is important to make that clear. The hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings expressed a number of concerns about collection methods. Let me be explicitly clear. It is not, and will not be, for the purchaser to specify collection methods. Clause 1(4)(d) says explicitly that the Secretary of State may require the purchaser"““to make specified arrangements in connection with the administration of loans””." In response to the comments by my hon. Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell), let me assure him categorically that I have no illusions: I am clear that he disagrees with me and the Government on this issue. I hope that he will accept, however, that it is a legitimate disagreement. There is a respectable left redistributive argument in favour of the system of student finance and fees that we have created. That is not his view, but others on the left take that view. My hon. Friend made a point about hypothecation of the proceeds from the sale of student loans. Let me make it clear that our record of investment in higher education is the best for a generation: it has increased by 23 per cent. in real terms over the past decade. I caution him against arguing for explicit hypothecation. Were we to put forward the argument now that the proceeds from sales must go to the higher education budget, that would create the grounds and circumstances for a future Government, who were not as well disposed towards higher education as we are, to say that higher education expenditure was dependent on loan sales. That would be a dangerous road to go down. My hon. Friend also raised the point about no real rate of interest. It is important to make it clear that our RPI mechanism is no real rate of interest. I would wish to assure my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham, South (Alan Simpson), who is no longer in the Chamber, that that RPI rate does go up and down, but for the vast majority of borrowers with income-contingent loans it makes no difference whatever to their monthly repayments, which will continue to be deducted at the rate of 9 per cent. of any income over £15,000 per annum. The interest rate only affects their outstanding loan balance.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
470 c1588-9 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Cost effectiveness Debts Debt collection Graduates Private sector Personal income Privatisation Parliamentary scrutiny Loans Sales Repayments Students Student Loans Company Cost of living
Legislation
Sale of Student Loans Bill 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk